News Article: GM Steve Staios looking for veteran help to assist the Senators' young core

[Relapsing]

Because Andlauer pays bills with real dollars.

Andlauer has to pay the following:

Stuzzle 2024/2025 6.5 M fantastic
Tkachuk 2024/2025 10.5 M... ouch
Norris 2024/2025 9.5 M... High Octane ouch
Batherson 2024/2025 5.4 M Ouch
Chabot 2024/2025 10 M.. High Octane Ouch
Chychrun 2024/2025 7 M... Ouch.. I mean ouch
Zub 2024/2025 4.8 M.. fantastic
Sanderson 2024/2025 8.05 M... fantastic
Korpisalo 2024/2025 5 M... f***ing ouch
Joseph 2024/2025 3.3 M... ouch


Can you see his issues? all the ouchs are more than AAV and the high Octane are more than AAV and a player underperforming.

On a team that will miss the playoffs this year. And so lose somewhere between 20 and 25 M.

Andlauers CFO will inform him that in 2024/2025, he may pay 5-10 M more than the CAP.

Bath and his contract is an ouch? What?

OK then... What aav is not an ouch for bath in your eyes?

 

[Beech]

Bath and his contract is an ouch? What?

OK then... What aav is not an ouch for bath in your eyes?

his AVV is okay.. Look at his true salary.. he will make 500 K more.

Remember: Andlauer pays real dollars, not AAV. And so he must be mindful. His revenue does not increase.. it is fixed. In fact it can only drop from its highest point. As his expenses grow, loses.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

The Senators aren’t ready to strike at their young core to make a deal.

There’s still a strong belief the likes of captain Brady Tkachuk, centres Josh Norris and Tim Stutzle, along with Drake Batherson, Thomas Chabot and Jake Sanderson are still the core of this team.

 

[Xspyrit]

Which of the following statements is more true?
a) the team is massively underperforming, which is why the results are what they are
b) the team was never good to begin with and it's no surprise it's not performing well

C) The team is massively underperforming but it was also not build properly with the wrong coaching staff and a lack of quality depth and veteran leadership


Quality vets is something I talked a lot about 3-4 seasons ago and I think it has been a MAJOR factor as well. We had Connor Brown, then we had Claude Giroux and that's about it.

Bath and his contract is an ouch? What?

OK then... What aav is not an ouch for bath in your eyes?

And Joseph ouch? One of the best bargains in the league outside of ELCs this season... Zub 4.8 is fantastic? Sanderson 8.05 is also fantastic? I don't think he has played close to his potential yet, it looked like he would early in the season but he's been fizzed in the mess like everyone else since.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Which of the following statements is more true?
a) the team is massively underperforming, which is why the results are what they are
b) the team was never good to begin with and it's no surprise it's not performing well

What do you believe?

At the beginning of the season if I'd known this is how bad it would turn out, I'd probably have said A, but the assumption was it was still going to be fighting to be a bubble team and question marks existed.

Now, with hindsight, it feels hard to deny B is the bigger factor and more of the truth of the matter. Chrychrun and Tarasenko look like questionable fits and now bring contract uncertainty, Dorion's specialty. DeBrincat trade blew up and Kubalik is a ghost. Goaltending is again a flop, despite more money spent on it. Coaching was again proven to not be up to task. Depth was tested and didn't deliver enough. Prospect pool is looking lackluster to insulate. Big expectations from injured returnee Josh Norris to contribute. Arguably from young players in general. Etc. etc.

I'd argue Dorion put together a decent roster on paper, but I don't think it's as simple as saying they underperformed outside of his control. He chose the ingredients and has tinkered a lot to get here. It has failed miserably, even if you're absolutely right about some underachievement, as well as some tough injury luck, but it seems like the proof is there.

 

[Loach]

What do you believe?

At the beginning of the season if I'd known this is how bad it would turn out, I'd probably have said A, but the assumption was it was still going to be fighting to be a bubble team and question marks existed.

Now, with hindsight, it feels hard to deny B is the bigger factor and more of the truth of the matter. Chrychrun and Tarasenko look like questionable fits and now bring contract uncertainty, Dorion's specialty. DeBrincat trade blew up and Kubalik is a ghost. Goaltending is again a flop, despite more money spent on it. Coaching was again proven to not be up to task. Depth was tested and didn't deliver enough. Prospect pool is looking lackluster to insulate. Big expectations from injured returnee Josh Norris to contribute. Arguably from young players in general. Etc. etc.

I'd argue Dorion put together a decent roster on paper, but I don't think it's as simple as saying they underperformed outside of his control. He chose the ingredients and has tinkered a lot to get here. It has failed miserably, even if you're absolutely right about some underachievement, as well as some tough injury luck, but it seems like the proof is there.

Looks good on paper, don't work on the ice....isn't that Poulin said?

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Looks good on paper, don't work on the ice....isn't that Poulin said?

Pretty much ya.

 

[Micklebot]

What do you believe?

At the beginning of the season if I'd known this is how bad it would turn out, I'd probably have said A, but the assumption was it was still going to be fighting to be a bubble team and question marks existed.

Now, with hindsight, it feels hard to deny B is the bigger factor and more of the truth of the matter. Chrychrun and Tarasenko look like questionable fits and now bring contract uncertainty, Dorion's specialty. DeBrincat trade blew up and Kubalik is a ghost. Goaltending is again a flop, despite more money spent on it. Coaching was again proven to not be up to task. Depth was tested and didn't deliver enough. Prospect pool is looking lackluster to insulate. Big expectations from injured returnee Josh Norris to contribute. Arguably from young players in general. Etc. etc.

I'd argue Dorion put together a decent roster on paper, but I don't think it's as simple as saying they underperformed outside of his control. He chose the ingredients and has tinkered a lot to get here. It has failed miserably, even if you're absolutely right about some underachievement, as well as some tough injury luck, but it seems like the proof is there.

Tarasenko is producing similarly to last year, on pace for 57 pts and is currently a plus 8, idk, he seems to be fitting in fine for the price paid, Kubalik on the other hand...

Chychrun there's more of a case, though he is on pace to match his career high in pts. No denying we needed a RHD that was more defensive minded though

In terms of whether we are under achieving or just not a good team, I'd argue out PP isn't a bad group of players, it's certainly underachieving, poor special team can really change the dynamics of a game. Pk probably should be better than it is too, though I wouldn't count it as a strength, but I never would have expected worst in the league.

Tbh, I don't really think it's a one or the other choice, imo, we are both underachieving, and the construction isn't quite as good as some may have initially thought.

 

[JD1]

Tarasenko is producing similarly to last year, on pace for 57 pts and is currently a plus 8, idk, he seems to be fitting in fine for the price paid, Kubalik on the other hand...

Chychrun there's more of a case, though he is on pace to match his career high in pts. No denying we needed a RHD that was more defensive minded though

In terms of whether we are under achieving or just not a good team, I'd argue out PP isn't a bad group of players, it's certainly underachieving, poor special team can really change the dynamics of a game. Pk probably should be better than it is too, though I wouldn't count it as a strength, but I never would have expected worst in the league.

Tbh, I don't really think it's a one or the other choice, imo, we are both underachieving, and the construction isn't quite as good as some may have initially thought.

The PK.

I used to ask often "who is going to PK when they move Zaitsev" because as much complaining as guys did about him, that stat was the only thing the team was quite good at and he was used on it a lot

From the start of the 21-22 season to the day he was traded - Feb 22, 2023 the Sens were 9th in GA/60 on the PK. Since that day 30th.

 

[Micklebot]

The PK.

I used to ask often "who is going to PK when they move Zaitsev" because as much complaining as guys did about him, that stat was the only thing the team was quite good at and he was used on it a lot

From the start of the 21-22 season to the day he was traded - Feb 22, 2023 the Sens were 9th in GA/60 on the PK. Since that day 30th.

So, the PK taking a hit wasn't too surprising, it being worst in the league bad though, I didn't expect that. Using your timeframe, our underlying metrics aren't that bad, xGa/60, SCA/60, HDCA/60 are all ok, not great but ok, but sv% is worst in the league.

It's also worth noting Zaitsev only played 28 games his last year here before getting traded, he was a healthy scratch for over half the possible ges, not sure how big of an impact his loss really could have had, though his PK GA numbers were crazy low in that 28 game stretch

 

[JD1]

So, the PK taking a hit wasn't too surprising, it being worst in the league bad though, I didn't expect that. Using your timeframe, our underlying metrics aren't that bad, xGa/60, SCA/60, HDCA/60 are all ok, not great but ok, but sv% is worst in the league.

It's also worth noting Zaitsev only played 28 games his last year here before getting traded, he was a healthy scratch for over half the possible ges, not sure how big of an impact his loss really could have had, though his PK GA numbers were crazy low in that 28 game stretch

The stats I posted were from the start of the 21 season. Zaitsev played 90 games from then until he was traded.

 

[Big Muddy]

Does anybody know which coach handles the PK?

Having our pro-scouting department identify good free agent PK specialists might be an idea.

Getting Joseph should help a little, although not sure when our PK woes first started. It might have been bad the entire year.

As for this year, just tank and get the best draft pick possible. Maybe Anaheim are showing us that strategy?

 

[Joeyjoejoe]

Can we have Watson back? Only getting about 6min of ice time in Tampa with no PK time at all.

While he was averaging 2min a game of PK here last year. Only behind Joseph and Kelly.

 

[SpezDispenser]

What an unenviable task Staios has. Most times this would be 'kind of' fun, you get to rip apart a roster you inherit and you have no ties to anyone, but who the heck are you moving out? Certainly not Tkachuk (unless he asks out), Stu, Sanderson, Zub, Chychrun and most likely not Norris and Chabot. Also extremely unlikely you trade Pinto and Greig and Joseph. So....what exactly are you doing?

Tarasenko and Kubalik? Ok, great. So you try to replace Tarasenko with a big, fast winger next year and you try to get a shutdown right handed d-man and just bench Hamonic? These are the big changes?

So...in other words, this would be a coach thing period, where a coach comes in and teaches them that there are, in fact, three zones?

And then you have to decide to fire the goalies into the sun or not, I guess, but seriously, what big changes are there to be made?

 

[Big Muddy]

What an unenviable task Staios has. Most times this would be 'kind of' fun, you get to rip apart a roster you inherit and you have no ties to anyone, but who the heck are you moving out? Certainly not Tkachuk (unless he asks out), Stu, Sanderson, Zub, Chychrun and most likely not Norris and Chabot. Also extremely unlikely you trade Pinto and Greig and Joseph. So....what exactly are you doing?

Tarasenko and Kubalik? Ok, great. So you try to replace Tarasenko with a big, fast winger next year and you try to get a shutdown right handed d-man and just bench Hamonic? These are the big changes?

So...in other words, this would be a coach thing period, where a coach comes in and teaches them that there are, in fact, three zones?

And then you have to decide to fire the goalies into the sun or not, I guess, but seriously, what big changes are there to be made?

I've been thinking about the same thing, What is the solution?

We definitely need a RD. That is pretty obvious. We've got ample LDs, but a hole in the top 4 RD. They probably need to figure out the strategy with Chychrun and his next contract if that's the direction they want to head in.

But, acquiring a good, top 4 RD is pretty difficult to do & will likely take premium assets if the goal is to have one in place on our blueline next season. Some teams (one example would be Toronto) have been trying to do this for close to a decade.

It should be easy enough to get a decent enough winger to play in the top 6 through free agency I'd think.

I've been mulling this over a bit. Maybe moving Norris & Chabot is what it's going to take. I was initially lukewarm to that Idea, but starting to wonder if that's a necessary strategy. If a trade is in the works, I hope it's a really good player with term.

Tarasenko, Kubalik and probably Brannstrom are the more obvious moves, but don't think those moves will move the needle much or make a significant difference.

 

[Loach]

I've been thinking about the same thing, What is the solution?

We definitely need a RD. That is pretty obvious. We've got ample LDs, but a hole at a top 4 RD. They probably need to figure out the strategy with Chychrun and his next contract if that's the direction they want to head in.

But, acquiring a good, top 4 RD is pretty difficult to do & will likely take premium assets if the goal is to have one in place on our blueline next season. Some teams (one example would be Toronto) have been trying to do this for close to a decade.

It should be easy enough to get a decent enough winger to play in the top 6 through free agency I'd think.

I've been mulling this over a bit. Maybe moving Norris & Chabot is what it's going to take. I was initially lukewarm to that Idea, but starting to wonder if that's a necessary strategy. If a trade is the works, I hope its a really good player with term.

Tarasenko, Kubalik and probably Brannstrom are the more obvious moves, but don't think those moves will move the needle much or make a significant difference.

Maybe getting a stay at home LD and a 200ft rd is the way to go?

 

[Big Muddy]

Maybe getting a stay at home LD and a 200ft rd is the way to go?

Well sure, but if we do that by trade, we are going to move really significant assets to accomplish that.

 

[Loach]

Well sure, but if we do that by trade, we are going to move really significant assets to accomplish that.

People are getting moved. Up front and on D, beyond Tarasenko, Kubalik and Brannstrom. I just think the players coming back are going to be second/third liners and second/third pair D. Filling out the roster depth with players that fit. I don't think it will be 8m$ player out and a different style 8m$ player in.

 

[SpezDispenser]

I've been thinking about the same thing, What is the solution?

We definitely need a RD. That is pretty obvious. We've got ample LDs, but a hole at a top 4 RD. They probably need to figure out the strategy with Chychrun and his next contract if that's the direction they want to head in.

But, acquiring a good, top 4 RD is pretty difficult to do & will likely take premium assets if the goal is to have one in place on our blueline next season. Some teams (one example would be Toronto) have been trying to do this for close to a decade.

It should be easy enough to get a decent enough winger to play in the top 6 through free agency I'd think.

I've been mulling this over a bit. Maybe moving Norris & Chabot is what it's going to take. I was initially lukewarm to that Idea, but starting to wonder if that's a necessary strategy. If a trade is the works, I hope its a really good player with term.

Tarasenko, Kubalik and probably Brannstrom are the more obvious moves, but don't think those moves will move the needle much or make a significant difference.

I think it's something where if you move Norris, you miss that depth at C that we've longed for - even if it isn't working right now, Norris can be given a pass for not playing hockey for so long. Unless they see Pinto as the 2C and Greig as the 3C, but that's a slight reach IMO.

Then there's the real possibility that Norris isn't really moveable right now with that contract and his shoulder concerns.

I dunno man, as I said, unenviable.

I'd shoot for the stars and try to get a legit 1A goalie, but who and where?

 

[Big Muddy]

People are getting moved. Up front and on D, beyond Tarasenko, Kubalik and Brannstrom. I just think the players coming back are going to be second/third liners and second/third pair D. Filling out the roster depth with players that fit. I don't think it will be 8m$ player out and a different style 8m$ player in.

There's quite a big difference between a 2nd pair D and a 3rd pair D, and also a 2nd line forward versus and a 3rd line forward. I think if we are just tinkering with 3rd pairing defenders and 3rd line players, we won't see much of a difference, even if they play a different style.

In the post I made, if we contemplated moving let's say Chabot and Norris, we need a good, minute munching 1st/2nd pair RD. Same idea with Norris, except it would be 2C of course. Unless of course we think Pinto can fill that role which we tried last year with so-so results.

Otherwise, like I said in the first paragraph, I don't see us upgrading and being a better team. I think they need to wait and see what differences the new coaching focus will be of course. I get the idea that it could be a different style player, but we still need skill and to get goals. JMHO of course.

I agree with Kubalik, Tarasenlo and Brannstrom. Those moves seem inevitable.

 

[Hale The Villain]

What an unenviable task Staios has. Most times this would be 'kind of' fun, you get to rip apart a roster you inherit and you have no ties to anyone, but who the heck are you moving out? Certainly not Tkachuk (unless he asks out), Stu, Sanderson, Zub, Chychrun and most likely not Norris and Chabot. Also extremely unlikely you trade Pinto and Greig and Joseph. So....what exactly are you doing?

Tarasenko and Kubalik? Ok, great. So you try to replace Tarasenko with a big, fast winger next year and you try to get a shutdown right handed d-man and just bench Hamonic? These are the big changes?

So...in other words, this would be a coach thing period, where a coach comes in and teaches them that there are, in fact, three zones?

And then you have to decide to fire the goalies into the sun or not, I guess, but seriously, what big changes are there to be made?

It's the same task Patrik Allvin had when he took over the Canucks GM job.

Had a talented core in place that had experienced nothing but losing hockey games because they played lazy uninspired one-dimensional hockey.

Also had little in the way of prospects and picks to trade to improve the team because the previous GM was an idiot and burned through futures on ill-sighted acquisitions (sound familiar?).

Allvin didn't do much to the core. Really just traded Horvat and turned him into Hronek and Beauvillier.

There were plenty of rumours and talk about possibly trading Miller, Boeser, Garland, etc... but he didn't end up doing that.

Added some good depth players in Soucy, Cole, Lafferty, Bleuger and Suter, but the biggest impact he made by far is hiring a good coach that got the best out of his players.

Staios should use the Canucks' turnaround as a blueprint. We don't need to dump all our core guys, just need to hire a good coach that will promote two-way attentive hockey and improve the team's depth by pushing the deadweight (Kubalik, Hamonic, MacEwen, Kastelic, Kelly) out of the lineup.

 

[Big Muddy]

I think it's something where if you move Norris, you miss that depth at C that we've longed for - even if it isn't working right now, Norris can be given a pass for not playing hockey for so long. Unless they see Pinto as the 2C and Greig as the 3C, but that's a slight reach IMO.

Then there's the real possibility that Norris isn't really moveable right now with that contract and his shoulder concerns.

I dunno man, as I said, unenviable.

I'd shoot for the stars and try to get a legit 1A goalie, but who and where?

I echoed some of the same concerns in the post I just made.

And I agree, Staois has a tough decisions and job in the near future.

 

[Big Muddy]

It's the same task Patrik Allvin had when he took over the Canucks GM job.

Had a talented core in place that had experienced nothing but losing hockey games because they played lazy uninspired one-dimensional hockey.

Also had little in the way of prospects and picks to trade to improve the team because the previous GM was an idiot and burned through futures on ill-sighted acquisitions (sound familiar?).

Allvin didn't do much to the core. Really just traded Horvat and turned him into Hronek and Beauvillier.

There were plenty of rumours and talk about possibly trading Miller, Boeser, Garland, etc... but he didn't end up doing that.

Added some good depth players in Soucy, Cole, Lafferty, Bleuger and Suter, but the biggest impact he made by far is hiring a good coach that got the best out of his players.

Staios should use the Canucks' turnaround as a blueprint. We don't need to dump all our core guys, just need to hire a good coach that will promote two-way attentive hockey and improve the team's depth by pushing the deadweight (Kubalik, Hamonic, MacEwen, Kastelic, Kelly) out of the lineup.

Yes, I'd agree on the coaching part. That seems like the mandatory first step before the other steps occur.

I think the biggest improvement is getting team to play better team D and "hopefully" that will improve Goals Against and goalie stats.

People get too focused on players like Kelly imho. I don't love him, but he makes $762 k. So I'd wonder if massive improvements are likely with players at that price point.

They do need to fix the PK though, so if there's some kind of move there to facilitate that, that would be good.

 

[Loach]

There's quite a big difference between a 2nd pair D and a 3rd pair D, and also a 2nd line forward versus and a 3rd line forward. I think if we are just tinkering with 3rd pairing defenders and 3rd line players, we won't see much of a difference, even if they play a different style.

In the post I made, if we contemplated moving let's say Chabot and Norris, we need a good, minute munching 1st/2nd pair RD. Same idea with Norris, except it would be 2C of course. Unless of course we think Pinto can fill that role which we tried last year with so-so results.

Otherwise, like I said in the first paragraph, I don't see us upgrading and being a better team. I get the idea that it could be a different style player, but we still need skill and to get goals. JMHO of course.

I agree with Kubalik, Tarasenlo and Brannstrom. Those moves seem inevitable.

I get what you're saying. I just think, if we trade Chabot, we won't get an 8m RD. It will be a RD that can play with Chych and other players that are second/third tweeners that play a different style of game, that work good on the ice, fill out the roster, depth. I'm having a hard time getting this thought out, sorry. Lol.

 

[Big Muddy]

I get what you're saying. I just think, if we trade Chabot, we won't get an 8m RD. It will be a RD that can play with Chych and other players that are second/third tweeners that play a different style of game, that work good on the ice, fill out the roster, depth. I'm having a hard time getting this thought out, sorry. Lol.

Yes, I get what you are saying. Perhaps we are saying the same thing?

I don't think the focus is on $8 m part either. I think the focus is finding two good top pairings and players that compliment each other (well three pairs would be good too of course).

The more obvious need is on the right side though. I don't think it will be an easy job though getting a good top 4 RD and you tend to get what you pay for as the expression goes.

I think the first step is to see what impact the change in coaches and coaching philosophy brings. Things could look different if there's positive coach impact.